Force is best applied by those ably trained in its use

Tony Vinson

"Tolerance of the use of a Taser in circumstances where no such threat exists takes us one step further down the path of inhumanity." Photo: Steven Siewert

Could anyone who has raised a teenager or simply retained a skerrick of common humanity not have been distraught and outraged by the recent 7.30 footage of a 14-year-old boy being twice Tasered by police and calling for help from his dead mother?

Or nodded in agreement when the State Coroner, Mary Jerram, compared officers involved in the death of Roberto Laudisio Curti earlier this year with ''schoolboys in Lord of the Flies''?

This year we have witnessed many incidents of a similar nature where there has been violence after no imminent threat to the life and limb of state officers. If we are not to progressively acclimatise ourselves to the standards of a repressive state, we must call a halt to the unjustifiable use of state violence.

We have been regaled throughout this year with video footage of punches flying, many inflicted by the long arm of the law in places as varied as the Sydney Cricket Ground, a courthouse and at the roadside following a police shooting at Kings Cross. We have witnessed the death of an apparently disoriented young man who was stunned multiple times with a Taser as he attempted to elude the police. Then we observed the passivity of prison officials as they stood by a man crawling across a prison wing floor to a cell in which he later died.

Advertisement

The appropriateness or otherwise of those actions can only be decided by an authority possessed of all the relevant facts. However, invariably such occurrences are followed by officials reminding us of the difficulties facing the upholders of the law. They then refer the matter to an internal police unit - like the Police Integrity Commission - or some other body for confidential adjudication. Usually after some time has elapsed a judgment is announced of the way the incident had been handled.

Such determinations are not always easy to make. While we should welcome a review of the guidelines on Taser use for police, NSW should have already benefited from a guideline formulated in the late 1970s to deal with the misuse of authority in the state's prisons.

We must acknowledge that state control agents in the form of police and prison officers do, on occasion, have to resort to the use of physical force while performing their duties. The better prepared these officers are to cope with such circumstances confidently and effectively, without resorting to more lethal control measures, the better for all concerned.

Some of the main elements of good preparation include physical fitness, training in unarmed combat and, where necessary, the relatively safe, controlled use of a baton. However, of equal if not greater importance is the strengthening through rehearsal of the judgment needed to decide whether anything other than a patient, unhurried authoritative demand for compliance with an order is necessary. Police in Victoria appear to have followed that approach successfully in dealing with a recent siege. Why aren't we seeing it in NSW?

All of these attributes can be strengthened through training. Sometimes, though, weapons will be necessary. When a real threat is posed to officers or members of the public, physical force may be necessary. But in a civilised, law-regulated community, what principle should be invoked in holding the officers accountable for this decision?

In the 1970s a royal commission detailed the barbarous misuse of authority in NSW prisons. When I was appointed chairman of the Corrective Services Commission in 1979, our immediate challenge was to establish what constituted lawful management of inmates. At the commission's request an inquiry was instituted into the (then) current disciplinary practices with a request that an explicit guideline be formulated by the presiding magistrate to evaluate what was an acceptable use of force.

The result was a simple principle that could be applied consistently across the system, which was readily understood by officers, administrators and prisoners: no more force should be used than is necessary to apprehend or control the aggression of an inmate.

Examples of officers continuing to punch an initially aggressive prisoner after that person had ''covered up'' were judged to constitute the unjustified use of force. The magistrate reported: ''No more force than is reasonably necessary in the circumstances should be used, and in my opinion, the blows delivered … after the first were unnecessary, and constituted a breach of duty.''

To avoid the danger of inconsistencies in different cases, and to satisfy the public's understandable desire to know the basis on which we assess the conduct of state officers, an agreed basic principle regulating the use of force should be formulated and declared for NSW police. Immediately.

Past experience shows that the mere existence of a rule does not automatically transform the behaviour of all state control officers. But it does help to draw a line in the sand between unacceptable behaviour and self protection when under direct threat.

Tolerance of the use of a Taser in circumstances where no such threat exists takes us one step further down the path of inhumanity.

Tony Vinson is the former head of the NSW Department of Corrective Services.

66 comments

Even before the 14-year old was tasered he was blasted with pepper spray while hiding under a caravan. He was no danger to himself or anyone else while under the caravan, so why use the pepper spray?

The footage on 7.30 was deeply disturbing and was the police officer's threat to zap him again if he swore again - the sheer hypocrisy was that the officer's warning was littered with "f*ck" on multiple occassions and at this stage the boy was on his knees, handcuffed and with his head on the ground!

I have great respect for the police as an organisation and for most individual police officers, but the action of the officers in this instance was disgraceful and totally unnecessary - they were thugs and bullies.

Commenter

Kate G

Date and time

November 16, 2012, 5:43AM

I agree with you completely Kate. The sheer hypocrisy was apalling.

Here's an idea. As part of the Taser training why not have the police target each other with Tasers in their various methods so that the Police have a real understanding of the pain they are inflicting. I believe that once fully educated in the nature of the taser, their deployment might be more reserved. Also, have the police officer's who use the Taser as a weapon of torture charged as such.

Commenter

David

Location

Repton

Date and time

November 16, 2012, 9:18AM

Bring back the baton. At least you know you're doing harm when you're hitting someone with a baton. A taser on the other hand is a very abstract - it's easy to use and not so obvious how harmful it is.

Police *need* to be able to use strong force to protect themselves and the general public but I for one am strongly opposed to tasers.

Commenter

simon

Location

BNE

Date and time

November 16, 2012, 9:30AM

It's not as if a group of police randomly picked someone in a crowd and started tasering them. This person had commited a robbery, was high on drugs and alcohol, and was acting aggressively and irrationally. Without the benefit of commenters' 20/20 hindsight how were police to know this person's history or be able to predict how he would act, other than by evaluation of what they could see and hear?The police response was not inappropriate in the prevailing circumstances.

None of the commenters, despite all possessing the wisdom of Solomon and the restraint of the Dalai Lama, are likely to ever have been in a situtation like that which the police faced.

The worth of the judgements and opinions expressed here ought to be weighed against the improbability that the commenter has any expertise to support their point of view.(I do not exclude myself from this proviso-- my opinon is just as worthless as most of the others. But that's the point)

Commenter

Erynn

Location

Sydney

Date and time

November 16, 2012, 9:48AM

Erynn, you are totally confused. I'm talking about the 14-year aboriginal boy and you are talking about the young man and tourist Roberto Laudisio.

As for Roberto Laudisio, he stole two packets of biskets and your think that deserves repeated tasering? Even the shop keeper was more worried about the health of Roberto Laudisio than you and the shop keeper was worried about him at the time - not later with the aid of hindsight. The shop keeper couldn't care less about the biscuits, he knew he was not in any danger from Roberto Laudisio and that Roberto Laudisio was only a danger to himself.

In the case of Roberto Laudisio, the coroner and many other people totally disagree with you. The police acted totally inappropriately and a different group of police also acted totally inappropriately towards the 14-year old. Free fell to acquaint yourself with some facts of both cases.

Commenter

Kate G

Date and time

November 16, 2012, 10:36AM

"Free fell to acquaint yourself" bad typing day, that should be "Feel free to acquaint..."

BTW, Roberto Laudisio was not acting aggressively - he was running away from everyone, including the police - since when did running away become confused for aggression?

Commenter

Kate G

Date and time

November 16, 2012, 11:57AM

So much boohooing. Put yourself in the police officer's position. You are chasing down a suspect who has just robbed a store, who is without a shirt and who may be on drugs or alcohol. Is he armed? Is he a potential threat to bystanders? Who knows? The point is a few years back there was an outcry when French photographer Roni Levi was shot dead on Bondi Beach. Everyone was calling for Tasers. Now people die at the hands of police and Tasers are now also verboten. The death of the Brazilian tourist brings to the fore the need for better training, but the truth of the matter is that people will die at the hands of the police because it is an unfortunate outcome when the law enforcement rubber hits the civilian road. What I find more disturbing is why the Tasers supplied to the police are not fitted with TaserCam. This attachment captures the moment of Taser discharge and is used in the US to counter claims of police brutality. See the marketing video made by Taser here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Blhy1eQOjZQ

Until training improves, and devices like TaserCam are employed, the unfortunate truth is this will continue to happen. Officers will become more reluctant to use their weapons and thereby less likely to apprehend criminals, given than by doing their duty they will likely also get dragged through an enquiry - as they should - but it is 2012 and the technology to at least back the officers actions up is available - the question needs to be why isn't the Government investing in these technologies given the impact in confidence on both serving police officers in carrying out their duties, and the public's trust in police process?

Commenter

Malik the magic sheep

Date and time

November 16, 2012, 12:27PM

@ Malik

So you admit that there was no evidence that Roberto Laudisio Curti posed an obvious risk to anyone. "Who knows" indeed? But for the heinous crime of being disoriented, shirtless and having apparently shoplifted a packet of biscuits, you think it was appropriate for the police to apply lethal force?

No matter how I look at it from the cops' point of view, I can't get around the fact that Curti was unarmed, and was not threatening anyone with violence. SIX policemen applied bodily force, handcuffs and capsicum spray, and then applied a taser 14 times while the suspect was on the ground. The magistrate pointed out that he was struggling to breathe, but the police interpreted this as just another insubordinate bugger who needed to be put in his place. If it was up to me, they'd be facing manslaughter charges... at best.

Commenter

Red Pony

Date and time

November 16, 2012, 12:52PM

Police need to be criminally charged for misuse of force and be sacked. At the moment the unions protect these low lifes and move them on to other areas where they can ply their power trip on other unfortunates!

The use of tasers scares me as some useless cop could shoot you when you have absolutely no involvement in an incident and also whose to know if you have a heart condition or you could hit your head on the way down! Way too many risks to justify the way police use these weapons as compliance tools rather than to protect themselves from danger as a non lethal option.

Mind you the only people claiming theyre non lethal are the company that make them and the law enforcement agencies that buy them! Tasers are another case of Oz following US law enforcement decisions without basis and its has been an arse of a decision!

Speaking of white elephants from the US - Water cannon truck anyone???

These young police, male and female, do this tasering on people either because they're scared witless of actually having to deal with a person who is not disabled, or they're just living out their dreams of standing over ordinary people and exercising power over their life or death. Who hasn't seen how a lot of them operate - they stand there telling people who are calm, to calm down, and then the young cop gets so worked up themselves that they freak out. It's a comedy to watch them trying to incite otherwise calm people so that they can get aggressive with them. Why do you think comedies often parody such interactions? It's because that's what happens - regularly. My God - look at that Brazilian student footage, and the cops are still defending what happened. The coppers who jumped on that poor kid have apparently been promoted. What tha!